Method for the analysis, display and classification of event related potentials by interpretation of P3 responses

ABSTRACT

A method for recording and analyzing event-related potentials (ERP), and their respective P300 brain wave responses from a repeatedly presented guilty knowledge or control question stimulus interspersed with non-significant stimuli. A computer is utilized to interpret and analyze the responses for guilty knowledge and control question procedures.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a method for recording and analyzingevent-related potentials (ERP), and more particularly to a method ofmeasuring and determining P3 responses from a repeatedly presentedstimulus or stimuli interspersed with non-significant stimuli andanalyzing the measured ERP responses by means of a computer.

An electroencephalograph (EEG) is a device which measures and recordsbrainwave activity by sensing spontaneous electrical potential of aperson's scalp, cortex or cerebrum at various sites. Each EEG channelcorresponds to a particular electrode combination attached to thepatient. The sensed EEG potential at each channel is amplified by adifferential amplifier, and the amplifier output signal is typicallyused to control movement of the recording pen of a polygraph. The EEGrecord is a long strip of polygraph paper containing a wave form foreach EEG channel. The polygraph paper is driven at a pre-determined rate(e.g., 30 millimeters per second) and is graduated to representpredetermined time increments. A skilled neurologist must evaluate theEEG record to determine abnormalities in the EEG wave forms.

EEG signals exhibit different frequencies depending upon varyingactivity. The EEG signal frequencies are classified into four basicfrequency bands, which are generally referred to as "Delta" (0-3.5Hertz); "Theta" (4 to less than 8 Hertz); "Alpha" (8-13 Hertz); and"Beta" (greater than 13 Hertz). The neurologist determines thepredominant frequency of a particular channel during a particular timeperiod by measuring the period of the EEG signal wave form shown on theEEG record. This requires considerable training and is highly dependentupon the skill of the neurologist, since the EEG signal wave formtypically includes multiple frequency components. EEG can be driven byspecific extrinsic or endogenous events. For example, a regularlyoccurring stimulus will elicit a series of waves each time it ispresented. The entire series is referred to as an event-relatedpotential (ERP).

Besides the frequency of the EEG or ERP wave forms, the amplitude isoften analyzed. Significance has been established when large amplitudesof brain waves occur at about 300 ms or more after the eliciting event.There is evidence to suggest that this P300 wave process is invoked whenthe updating, or "refreshing", of representations in working memory isrequired. Donchin, Psychophysiology, 18, 493-513 (1981); Fabiani, Karis,and Donchin, Psychophysiology, 22, 588-589 1985); and others. LargeP300's are elicited by rare or unexpected events, when they are relevantto the task the subject is performing. Such events may lead torestructuring or updating of working memory, and this activity is partof the ongoing process of maintaining accurate schemas of theenvironment. The updating process may lead to an "activation" of therepresentation, or to the "marking" of some attribute of the event thatwas crucial in determining the updating process. This restructuring ofthe representation of an event is assumed to facilitate the subsequentrecall of the event, by providing valuable retrieval cues, so that thegreater the restructuring that follows an individual event, the higherthe probability of later recalling that event. If P300 amplituderepresents the degree of restructuring in working memory, then P300amplitude should also predict later recall. Fabriani, Karis and Donchin,Psychophysiology, Vol. 23, 298-308 (1986).

In view of the current knowledge of the frequency and amplitude of brainwave forms and with the advent of widespread use of the computer inbehavioral neuroscience, the analysis of data has become easier.

Oftentimes, it is desirable to have an objective method of determiningwhether or not a person has seen or otherwise has knowledge of aparticular item, such as a weapon, a crime scene configuration, a secretdocument, a stolen object, or another person's face. Such knowledge iswhat is taught by prior art procedures and devices used in "guiltyknowledge" tests, a sub-category of procedures used in physiologicaldetection of deception ("lie detection"). The present invention isdirected to a reliable, valid easy-to-use and accurate procedure fordetermining guilty or other knowledge on the part of an individual whosesimple verbal report may be unreliable for various reasons.

If a discreet stimulus --a sound, a light flash, a tap--is presented toa human, his electroencephalogram shows a series of time-lockedresponses called event related potentials (ERP). It was shown in the1960's that if a subject is presented with a series of stimuli of twotypes, e.g., a high tone and a low tone, and if either of those tones ispresented in 20 of 100 trials (with the remaining 80 trials containingthe other tone), the rare stimulus will evoke a large ERP referred to as"P3" or previously described P300 brain wave. In this so-called"odd-ball" paradigm, it is known that P3 amplitude varies with rarity.Sutton, S. et al., Science, 150, 1187-1188, (1965).

In the 1970's and thereafter, other workers reported that P3 is evokedby words (or pictures) previously seen by a subject when presented in aword (or picture) series which also includes novel words (or pictures)which fail to evoke P3. Karis, D. et al., Cognitive Psychology 16,177-216; Neville, H. et al., Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci. U.S.A., 79, 2121-2123,(1982).

The present invention relates to a novel method which utilizes both theaforementioned effects so that one can tell by ERP inspection alone,which of the presented stimuli has previously been seen by the subject.The invention further relates to an apparatus which provides means for arepeated presentation of the significant stimulus and means foranalyzing the ERP responses to determine significant P3 responses.

Sutton supra used P3 responses in an "odd-ball" procedure with simpleauditory stimuli, e.g. high tones and low tones, that were presentedsingly to subjects and whatever tone was presented less often evoked aP3 reponse. Pritchard, et al., Psychophysiology, Vol. 23, No. 2, 166-172(1986) utilizes the "odd-ball" paradigm in which the stimuli is a simplevisual flash differing in brightness. Johnson, Jr. Annuals of the N.Y.Acad. of Sci., Vol. 425, pages 223-230 (1984), like Pritchard, discussstudies utilizing P3 responses relating to memory updating processes,expectancy processes, surprise, and so forth. None of the prior artarticles disclose the odd-ball procedure with repeated, meaningful wordstimuli in the context to be utilized to detect guilty knowledge orother recognition processes. Fabiani, et al. Psychophysiology, Vol. 23,pp. 298-308 (1986) and Neville, et al. supra utilize verbal, meaningfulstimuli in a variant kind of "odd-ball", paradigm bearing on recognitionmemory, however, but differ greatly from the present invention by twoaspects: (1) these studies were not and could not be configured asfield-relevant deception detection paradigms, because (2) both novel andpreviously seen words (or pictures) in these studies were never repeatedwithin the EEG run. The average ERP to previously seen words (orpictures) was an average of responses to a series of all different words(or pictures); the average ERP to novel words (or pictures) was likewisean average of responses to all different novel words (or pictures) Thiskind of paradigm is likely to be specifically unsuited to realcriminal-type investigations since it is usually a single item (themurder weapon, the stolen item, the classified document), which isinvolved in a real crime. The Fabiani and Neville reports are directedat and tailored to scientific elucidation of memory processes. In thesestudies, the repetition of words is avoided for fear of engaginghabituation processes which would tend to reduce P3 effects.

In the present invention, the "odd-ball" item is "odd-ball" by virtue ofits familiarity (e.g., as guilty knowledge). The stimuli are allmeaningful words, and they are presented in the simplest possible, basic"odd-ball" design.

There are other studies in the literature which do not use quasi verbalstimuli which are repeatedly presented. A review of the literaturereveals that these studies are not using "odd-ball" paradigms, and are,in fact, studying memory processes with extremely complicated procedurestailored to these purposes: For example, Gomer et al., Physio. Psych.,Vol. 4 (1) pp. 61-65 (1976), (1976), Ford, et al., Elect. Clin.Neuroph., 47:450-459 (1979), Kramer et al. Psychophysiology, Vol. 23 No.1, 33-47 (1986) and Adam and Collins, Elec. Clin. Neuroph., 44:147-156(1978). All use "go-no go" or pattern matching paradigms. A set ofletters or numbers is memorized and then the subject is given a trialseries in which he decides whether ("go") or not ("no go") a memorizedtarget stimulus is presented. There are typically other differencesbetween these procedures and the present invention: The presentinvention requires but one series of trials; others use several sets.The present invention requires no feed-back whereas the prior artmethods do. The prior art methods use warning tones whereas the presentinvention does not. It is notable that typically, the prior art reportsP3 responses to both target and non-target stimuli. Although targeteffects are often reported to be bigger, unambiguous use of P3 responsesin field investigations of deception requires the kind of virtuallyall-or-none results that are seen in the present invention. Further, theprior art studies use simple stimuli, digits or letters, rather thanmeaningful words. The intent of the prior art methods was theelucidation of memory retrieval processes and are more often interestedin P3 latency than in amplitude.

Instruments have been used to determine psychological stress, forexample, the apparatus described in U.S. 2,944,542 relates to a bloodpressure measuring device that indicates variations in the velocity ofpulse waves, thereby indicating a change in emotional state. U.S.3,971,034 describes a method and apparatus for identifying psychologicalstress by converting oral impulses into electrical signals andrecording, observing and analyzing those signals. U.S. 3,893,450 relatesto a method and apparatus for examining brain wave form by providingstimuli such as light and determining the characteristic of amathematically determinal point in the brain wave forms of the subject.U.S. 4,188,956 relates to a method of acquiring compressing andanalyzing neurometric test data by means of a digital computer basesystem. U.S. 4,579,125 relates to a method for processing analog EEGsignals to provide an indication of cerebral activity. None of theteachings of these references however, have been used for thecombination of a method to determine P3 responses from a repeatedlypresented stimulus interspersed with non-significant stimuli to obtainresults directed towards lie detection and control question testing.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In accordance with the present invention, a method of measuring anddetermining P3 responses from a repeatedly presented stimulus or stimuliinterspersed with non-significant stimuli and analyzing the measured ERPresponses by means of a computer is described. The method comprisespresenting to a subject stimuli that are usually rare and relevantinterspersed in a series of frequent and usually irrelevant stimuli,recording the reaction to the irrelevant stimuli by P300 brain waveforms and interpreting the amplitudes of those brain waves which formwithin a certain time segment post-stimulus to indicate "knowledge". Theinterpretation and analysis of the brain waves is performed by computerin the context of the present procedure. Guilty knowledge and controlquestion tests may be utilized for various purposes.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic representation of the system utilized in thepresent invention for P300 analysis.

FIGS. 2 through 7 graphically represent P300 brain waves.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a method and apparatus for recordingand analyzing event related potentials (ERP) and specifically a methodof measuring and determining P3 responses from a repeatedly presentedstimulus interspersed with non-significant stimuli and analyzing themeasured ERP responses by means of a computer. The present inventionprovides a method for analysis and display of quantitative featuresextracted from event related potentials generated by the brain inresponse to presented conditions and challenges. While many embodimentsof the present invention are known and recognized by those skilled inthe art, the present invention is directed at controlled testingmethods, i.e., guilty knowledge detection or control questioning. Thisemphasis is not intended to be limiting.

Accordingly, the method of the present invention relates to evokingevent related potentials, interpreting and displaying the P300 responseswhich comprises attaching a series of electrodes to the subject scalp,presenting a specified challenge or condition relating to guiltyknowledge or control questioning, recording the electrical brainactivity relating to the cognitive processes, extracting significantquantitative features from those data, particularly the amplitude ofP300 brain waves, and statistically analyzing the extracted featuresaccording to a systematic procedure. P300 brain wave amplitude rangingfrom 400 to 800 millisecond post- stimulus is determined to beinterpretive of a significant response in the controlled testing methodsof the present invention, preferably either in guilty knowledgedetection or control questioning.

GUILTY KNOWLEDGE DETECTION

With reference to FIG. 1, a subject is seated before a computer terminalwith electrodes attached to three scalp sites: the vertex (CZ),central-parietal (PZ) and central-frontal (FZ). Optionally, earphonesare also worn. Event related potentials (ERP) are amplified 60,000 timesand filtered to exclude activity below 0.1 and above 30 Hz. Eye movementis recorded with electrodes above and below the eyes and processed fordisqualifying purposes. Eye movements and blinks can produce artifactswhich must be removed from the data base. At the conclusion of arecording, average wave forms from CZ, PZ, and FZ and from the eyechannel are available. The flatness of the wave forms from the eyechannel insures artifact free testing. Further, muscular activity fromthe jaw and forehead surfaces can be measured and utilized as normativecriteria for rejection of data contaminated by abnormal muscularactivity. This is particularly more important for field applications inwhich subjects motivated to defeat the test can clench jaws and therebygenerate muscular activity signals which would be noise sources for ERPdata.

The following procedures below can be utilized in a guilty knowledgeparadigm and/or are adapted to auditory presentation and stimuli inaccordance with the schematic representation of FIG. 1. The proceduresare shown in both laboratory setting and a field setting.

    __________________________________________________________________________    Procedures with Subjects                                                      Lab                   Field                                                   __________________________________________________________________________      Guilty knowledge induction:                                                                       (e.g.) Criminal steals an item                            Subject chooses an item from                                                  a box. Experimenter is not                                                    told what item is chosen.                                                     Subject is asked to pretend                                                   he has stolen his chosen item                                                 and is taking a lie detector                                                  test.                                                                         Instructions to subject,                                                      pre-prime phase:                                                              Briefly, subject will be                                                                          Subject likewise will be                                  shortly viewing 9-word set                                                                        told to watch for an item                                 "P", which does not include                                                                       he is suspected of                                        his chosen/stolen item. He                                                                        recently stealing. The                                    is now told to count the                                                                          item is not named. He is                                  word "Rubies" which will                                                                          told to look for and                                      appear. He is also told he                                                                        count one word in the                                     will not be able to help                                                                          set. It can be arbitrar-                                  noticing when his chosen-                                                                         ily selected (as at left)                                 stolen item appears. In fact,                                                                     or actually be an item he                                 in phase #3, the next (priming)                                                                   has stolen at a different                                 phase, he will see nine words                                                                     time as determined by                                     presented one at a time every                                                                     records and/or interroga-                                 2 seconds. The word "rubies"                                                                      tion. It is not the item                                  will appear, but the chosen/                                                                      he is currently suspected                                 stolen item will not appear.                                                                      of stealing. Warnings                                     The aim is to raise expectancy                                                                    given as at left, about                                   and anticipation. Warnings                                                                        paying attention.                                         about failing to pay attention                                                are given. Subject is warned                                                  that he must have a reasonably                                                accurate count of counted item                                                or we'll know of inattention.                                                 He's also told he will not be                                                 able to help noticing chosen                                                  item when it is given.                                                        Prime Phase                                                                   Subject views words from set                                                                      Similarly                                                 "P". These are all different                                                  from but comparable in value,                                                 size, etc., to the items of set                                               "E" with which he wlll be later                                               presented in the Test run. He                                                 has been told to watch for one                                                item ("rubies") to count. 108                                                 trials in all are used. Word                                                  choice is randomly determined,                                                and each word is presented about                                              12 times each.                                                                Reinforcement of Awareness                                                    of Guilty Knowledge                                                           Experimenter/operator asks                                                                        Operator asks for count                                   subject for count of counted                                                                      of counted word. If it                                    item and if he saw chosen/stolen                                                                  is off by 3%, suspect is                                  item. When subject says "no"                                                                      warned he is suspected of                                 the experimenter asks "Do you                                                                     non-cooperation. He is                                    recall chosen item?" When                                                                         asked if he saw a                                         subject replies affirmatively,                                                                    recently stolen item                                      experimenter tells him to write                                                                   during the stimulus                                       a 100-200 word essay explaining                                                                   presentation.                                             choice. This is privately done                                                and the essay paper is still                                                                      Suspect is interrogated                                   retained by the subject who has                                                                   so if he's guilty this                                    no reason to believe that                                                                         procedure will reinforce                                  experimenter knows identity of                                                                    his knowledge and memory                                  actually chosen item.                                                                             of stolen item, though it                                                     is not mentioned. He can                                                      also be asked to think                                                        hard about any recent                                                         crimes.                                                   Pre-Test Phase Instructions                                                   Subject is instructed as in                                                                       Similarly.                                                phase 2 except that "diamonds"                                                is the to-be-counted word.                                                    Attentional warnings are given                                                again.                                                                        Test Phase                                                                    Subject views word set "E"                                                                        As at left, except                                        whose contents are different                                                                      actually stolen item of                                   than "P". 9 words are used and                                                                    which suspect is                                          this time, the chosen/stolen                                                                      suspected of stealing is                                  item is one of the 9 words                                                                        is presented along with                                   repeatedly presented. 108                                                                         8 other words.                                            trials are given as in 3.                                                     Another embodiment of this                                                    procedure can be utilized where                                               instead of the chosen word's being                                            randomly presented about 12 times,                                            it is presented on trials 20, 26,                                             30, 50, 53, 60, 81, 87, 90, 99,                                               102 and 108. The aim of this is                                               to make its presentation appear more                                          rare. The priming procedure is                                                designed to raise anticipation;                                               Much time passes (in Phase 3) and                                             the chosen item is optimally rare;                                            i.e., it is absent. Then 19 trials                                            go by in this test phase before it                                            finally appears for the first time                                            on trial 20. Since the P3 response                                            of brain is in response to a rare                                             ("odd-ball") event, these procedures                                          are calculated to heighten this effect.                                       Post-Test Validations                                                         Subject is asked to write down                                                                    Similarly. If recall and                                  all recalled words (from set                                                                      recognition are sub-                                      "E"). He has 5 minutes; (5-6                                                                      normative, and/or if                                      items normative.) He is then                                                                      count of counted item is                                  given recognition test where                                                                      >3% off, suspect is                                       the words he failed to recall                                                                     warned of possible report                                 in recall test are presented in                                                                   of non-cooperation.                                       multiple choice fashion for                                                                       Another test may now be                                   him to identify. Total recog-                                                                     given; i.e., all                                          nition is normative. Count                                                                        procedures to be repeated                                 of counted item is taken.                                                                         on another day.                                           Standard P3 Test (optional)                                                   Subject is given standard                                                                         Similarly.                                                P3-odd-ball paradigm with rare                                                and frequent simple verbal                                                    stimuli to validate normal                                                    presence of P3 response to                                                    rare, counted stimuli. This                                                   is as recommended by Fabiani                                                  et al. (1987).                                                              __________________________________________________________________________

FIGS. 2 through 7 show data from randomly selected subjects who ran theforegoing test and were not eliminated for non-cooperation, e.g., poormemory test results, excessive artifact, etc. Two sets of four (4-set)waves (average ERP's voltage as a function of time) are shown on eachpage for subjects A and B. In the set of four waves, top left is CZ, topright FZ, bottom left, PZ and bottom right is the eye movement averagewhich should be flat. Each trace is labeled with letters to the left andright of a slash. To the right is the subject identification; to theleft is an item type which elicited the wave set. That is, "CH/A" refersto the chosen item for subject A, "NC/A" is a non-chosen; non-TBC itemfor subject A, "TBC/A" is the to-be-counted response 4-set for subjectA; P3 responses are indicated with arrows. To the eye, they seem toappear only in the CH and TBC waves. Positivity is down, vertically, oneCM=10 uV sweep length =1280 m sec. Stimulus is not presented until 100 msec. into the sweep (about a centimeter, horizontally).

The average EEG amplitude for 100 m sec. pre-stimulus is the base linefrom which the dependent values are subtracted. Those values are: 1.average value from 400 m sec. to 800 m sec. post-stimulus; 2. maximumamplitude of 100 m sec. segment between 400 and 800 m sec. An auxiliaryreference for these P3 estimates is the maximum negative peakimmediately following P3, e.g., from 700 to 1400 m sec. If thechosen/stolen item values are significantly larger than correspondingvalues for all other items (except for counted item), this subject ispresumed to have guilty knowledge. It is evident that all ERP's tochosen-"stolen" and to TBC items show P3's especially in the PZelectrode. The ERP's to other ("NC") items do not show ERP's.Accordingly, it should be emphasized that what is pointed out as a P3 isin each case confirmed by computer analysis. Comparison should be madefrom CZ record of one 4-set (EG "CH") to the CZ record of another 4-set(EG "NC"), from FC to FC and from PZ to PZ, etc. The bottom left in each4-set should be compared with bottom left in a comparison 4-set. Wavesmust be compared at matching time segments.

The criterion for a diagnosis of deception, that is, that the chosen orstolen item's ERP values are larger than all other comparable ERP valuesis extremely conservative and could lead to occasional innocentdiagnoses of guilty persons. Norms may be developed according to thedesires of the investigator, for example norms that may be developed fora different, less-conservative but valid criterion are as follows: theaverage of all novel (non-chosen/stolen, and non-counted) items arecalculated. This mean is subtracted from the mean of the ERP associatedwith the chosen/stolen item. The difference obtained is eitherimprobably large and indicative of deception, or it is not sufficientlylarge. Exact values for decision criteria will come from a normativestudy of 100 normals in which the properties of the distribution ofdifferences (chosen/stolen values versus mean of other item values) areobtained in a situation where a control word is used in place of thesubject chose/stolen item. In test runs, difference values more than 2standard deviations from the mean have only a 2.5% likelihood of beingobtained by chance. Of course, 3 or more standard deviation criterionmay be utilized.

CONTROL QUESTION TEST

In the previously described paradigm, it is assumed that only a guiltyperson has specific guilty knowledge which his brain will recognize.Prior to the actual lie detection test, it is assumed he does not knowthat the investigators have a specific piece of guilty knowledge aboutthe crime which they will test him with, e.g., the specific item stolen,etc. It is assumed that there has been no publicity or interrogationabout this detail prior to the test. If the individual has in fact beeninterrogated about a particular item of knowledge, then whether one usesstandard autonomic response polygraphy or the method of the presentinvention, a response to the test item may not be due to guiltyknowledge but to the priming effect of interrogation about the item. Aninnocent individual questioned about a stolen necklace could respond tothe test item "necklace" simply because he knows he is suspected ofstealing the necklace in consequence of his having been questioned aboutit. Possibly, he has heard of the specific details of a crime which werepublicized, prior to interrogation. Interrogation itself will thenimpart an oddball quality to the item; i.e., it may have been the onlyone he has been questioned about. In this regard, the guilty knowledgeprocedure may not be useable. Further, in some crimes, the circumstancesare such that the actual perpetrators do not know the specific detailsof a crime for various reasons, such as anxiety, etc. In thesesituations, the guilty knowledge test may be of limited use.

Control question procedures have been developed for these types ofsituations. In prior art control question procedures in autonomicresponse polygraphy, during the suspect's questioning about the matterunder investigation, he is also intensely interrogated about other actsin crimes or faults, stated to be pertinent to the matter underinvestigation, including the minor ones of normal childhood. Informationregarding thought about but not actually perpetrated acts may beelicited. The so-called "control questions" are formulated by theexaminer which will ask these general areas which are not actuallyspecific to the crime under investigation. The suspect, however, is toldthat during the actual lie detector test, investigators will beinterested in physiological responses to all questions (i.e., in thespecific crime relevant as well as in control question areas). Theinvestigators, however, are actually interested in responses to specificcrime relevant questions The suspect is told this on the theory that ifhe is innocent he will be just as upset and responsive about controlarea questions as he is about crime relevant areas. The guilty person,however, knows he is guilty of a specific crime and is suspected to bemore concerned about it than about control areas since his own detectionapprehension regarding his crime stires up his concern His autonomicnervous system is expected to respond more to relevant than to controlquestions.

Although the autonomic responses in the standard control question testare usually thought of indexing differential general sympathetic arousaland emotionality levels, it can be argued that the specific informationcontents of control and relevant questions are also differentiallyresponded to in the control question test Accordingly, it is furthersurmised that ERP responses of brain are more likely to differentiateinformation differences than are integrated physiological measurementsas in prior control question test procedures. This follows from the factthat the brain's response to input information must temporarily precedeand indeed direct the autonomic response output indexing emotionAdditionally, this emotional state is likely more subject variousongoing "noise" sources, such as that due to being under suspicion, thanis the cognitive state, the subject's knowledge of his guilt orinnocence. This knowledge should remain largely independent ofbackground emotional level, i.e., whether or not one is upset or placid,one knows whether or not one is innocent or guilty. Accordingly, themethod and apparatus of the present invention measure P3 responses in acontrol question procedure.

In the control question procedure, which is one of many embodiments ofthe present invention, that follows, electrophysiological and dataanalytic methods are the same as those described in the guilty knowledgeprocedure. Similarly, subjects in a lab situation choose one item fromnine in a box. The one of nine ratio makes a relevant item have an 11%probability. Since P3 is evoked by rare (less than or equal to stimuli,the relevant item probability is less than 20%.

In this procedure, differing from the guilty knowledge test procedure,the subject will be asked to identify an act he is guilty of from amonga context of other acts including innoculous acts such as "had abirthday", etc. as well as acts regarding general (control question)areas such as "stolen from work". The control question items are, as inthe prior art control questions procedures, designed to involve andarouse innocent subjects. The purpose of the innocuous item (as with theirrelevant questions also used in prior art) is to establish a base lineresponse level.

    ______________________________________                                        Lab                  Field                                                    ______________________________________                                        1.  Crime occurs                                                                  Subject chooses an item, e.g.,                                                                     Suspect commits crime,                                   a camera, from a box of 9 items                                                                    e.g., he steals a camera                                 in response to question "choose                                                                    from his place of                                        an item you'd like to keep if                                                                      employment.                                              you could." He will later be                                                  asked to pretent he stole the item.                                       2.  Criminal and control area                                                     interrogation                                                             Subject isb "guilty"                                                              (a) Suspect is interro-                                                       told that among the several                                                                        gated in this real                                       subjects who are in the lab                                                                        investigation, about the                                 that day, one selected a camera                                                                    crime but also --                                        (a lab "innocent" subject is                                                  questioned about an item he did                                               not choose) and the investigators                                             must, after various procedures,                                               decide who it is who chose the                                                camera. Various questions are                                                 asked about the subject's possible                                            interest in cameras. This procedure                                           is supposed to model the criminal                                             investigation.                                                                (b) Subject is then asked in                                                                       (b) in a control area so                                 detail about other crimes planned,                                                                 as to arouse an innocent                                 thought about, wished, or done                                                                     subject's concern with                                   in near and distant past. This                                                                     control items; to                                        is meant to stir up concern                                                                        equalize concern across                                  about the control question area                                                                    control and relevant                                     in "innocent" subjects, but                                                                        items.                                                   obviously, "guilty" subjects                                                  must be treated similarly since                                               guilt and innocence are not known                                             a priori in field situations.                                             4.  Priming Phase                                                                 (a) Subject's electrodes are attached                                                              (a) these procedures are                                 and he is told he will see (or                                                                     quite parallel to the                                    hear in an auditory embodiment)                                                                    procedures at left except                                a series of phrases which                                                                          as noted. It is also                                     describe various acts, thefts                                                                      noted that these priming                                 and crimes and which may,                                                                          procedures are not                                       include the phrase "stole the                                                                      utilized in prior art lie                                `item`", where `item` will                                                                         detection. There is no                                   correspond to the stolen/                                                                          need to stir up                                          selected item in phase 1,                                                                          expectancy and rareness                                  above. Subject is also told                                                                        with autonomic response                                  he'll see (hear) the phrase                                                                        polygraphy. There is                                     "came to lab" on occasion. When                                                                    with P3 methodology.                                     he sees this choice, he is told                                               to press the button in his dominant                                           hand (right if right-handed) to                                               signify "yes, this is true."                                                  Subject is then told to press                                                 button in non-dominant hand so as                                             to say "no" to other items if they                                            are not true. In lab condition,                                               subjects are told that this means                                             they must lie in order to evade                                               detection. The purpose of the                                                 button-press choices (with one                                                built-in "yes" response) is, as                                               before, to force attention to                                                 and a decision about the stimulus                                             on each trial. In this priming                                                phase, subjects see a set of phrases                                          different from what they will see in                                          the actual test run(below). There                                             are some similarities, however, in                                            context. E.g., if they are to see                                             (hear) "cheated the boss" in this                                             priming phase. If they are to see                                             (hear) " took the camera" in the test                                         run, they will see (hear) something                                           like "took the telescope" in this                                             priming phase. They never do see                                              the chosen/stolen item in this                                                priming phase. As in the GK test,                                             this priming phase is designed to                                             raise anticipation for the actually                                           relevant act (e.g., "took the                                                 camera") and to make it appear as                                             a more dramatic rare event when it                                            appears later during the test run.                                            For innocent subjects, these                                                  questions are also a kind of priming                                          control questions and are designed                                            to raise concern about other areas                                            of suspected crime and dilute the                                             oddball quality-generating effect of                                          being suspected of the relevant crime.                                        (b) Subject is subjected to 108                                               priming stimulus presentations                                                (9 phrases, 12 times each).                                                   (c) Subject in lab model is asked                                             "did you see (hear) your `crime`"                                             to which he will say "no". He is                                              then asked to write an essay about                                            his chosen item. (This is for lab                                             model only so as to reinforce                                                 subject's knowledge of his choice.)                                           (d) Subject is told "We believe,                                              based on your reaction times on                                               your button presses and on the                                                brain waves we've seen so far                                                 that you really have at least                                                 thought about stealing in the past,                                           that you may have been involved                                               in minor crimes in the past and                                               in cheating or fooling people for                                             your own gain. In this last test                                              to come next we'll identify                                                   your present crime."                                                          (e) In the lab situation we would                                                                  It may be possible to                                    also add "we know you took either                                                                  use a procedure like this                                the camera, the ring, or the                                                                       in the field also. (See                                  pearls and this last test will                                                                     5b, below.)                                              tell us." A "guilty"subject                                                   (who did choose camera should                                                 react to "took the camera" in                                                 the next test. A lab subject                                                  manipulated to be "innocent"                                                  will have chosen a different                                                  item, either ring or pearls (in                                               this example) and should not                                                  react to "took the camera" but                                                to a control item such as                                                     "took the pearls".                                                        5.  Test Run Phase                                                                (a) After being instructed to                                                 press the "yes" button if he                                                  sees a true answer such as                                                    "took lie test" he receives                                                   the following stimulus presen-                                                tations 12 times each: one                                                    relevant item; "took the camera",                                             3 general control items; "stole                                               from work", "think of stealing",                                              and "try to steal", 3 irrelevant                                              items to which the subject must                                               respond "no" truthfully; "born a                                              man" (if a woman), "went to                                                   college" (if he did not go),                                                  and "had small pox" (if didn't);                                              and finally a truthful irrelevant                                             item "took lie test" which must                                               be answered "yes". Lab "guilty"                                               subjects are again instructed                                                 to lie if they see their "crime".                                             (b) In the lab situation,                                                                          This replacement of                                      one or more of the control                                                                         control questions can be                                 items may be replaced by more                                                                      done in field also if                                    specific control items such as                                                                     suspect can be reasonably                                "took the pearls". An                                                                              persuaded that he is                                     experimentally manipulated                                                                         under suspicion for                                      "innocent" subject will have                                                                       having stolen other                                      actually taken (chosen) the                                                                        fictitiously missing                                     "pearls"but will have been                                                                         items. In this case a                                    questioned about "camera" as                                                                       modified version of                                      in 2a) above. A "guilty"                                                                           procedure 4e) above can                                  subject will have taken and                                                                        also be used in priming                                  will have been "interrograted"                                                                     phase.                                                   about "camera". He will also                                                  have been interrograted about                                                 a non-chosen item to match the                                                "innocent" subject's treatment,                                               but he knows what his true                                                    "crime" was. It is noted that                                                 the irrelevant "no" items here                                                are a significant variation                                                   from what is presently done                                                   with control items in standard                                                autonomic response polygraphy                                                 in which the irrelevant items                                                 are typically answered (truth-                                                fully) "yes" . We have subjects                                               say "no" truthfully to these                                                  items so as to preserve the                                                   uniqueness (oddballness) of                                                   the truthfully answered, "yes"-                                               irrelevant item. We do not                                                    want big P3 responses except                                                  to the target and relevant                                                    items in guilty subjects and                                                  to target and control items in                                                innocent subjects. Thus we want                                               to minimize uniqueness of items                                               not designed to elicit P3 by                                                  making behavioural responses                                                  to them the same. Only the                                                    relevant and control items (for                                               guilty and innocent subjects,                                                 respectively) will be unique                                                  (along with the "yes" irrelevant                                              item) in that the subjects will                                               be concerned about their "no"                                                 answers to them.                                                          ______________________________________                                    

The ERP data are treated as previously described in the guilty knowledgeprocedure. Subjects are diagnosed as innocent if the P3 responses tocontrol items are larger than those to relevant items. The judgment isreversed if the P3 to relevant items is larger.

APPARATUS

Referring to FIG. 1, there is shown the system according to the presentinvention for analyzing the cognitive process of recognition comprisinga subject 1, with electrodes 2 attached thereto to pick up cortical EEGactivity from the scalp and bring it to biological amplifiers 3. In theschematic representation, only one complete EEG channel is shown. Inpractice, there are two other channels and an eye channel present.Therefore, there are 4 amplifiers and A/D converters, represented hereby numeral 4. Amplifier 3 receives brain waves from the head of thesubject by way of electrodes 2. The electrodes 2 are placed at thevertex, central parietal and central frontal portions of the subject'sscalp. An EEG cap (i.e., as manufactured by Electrocap, Inc., Dallas,Tex.) of molded pliable rubber may be used in which disposableelectrodes can be placed to make contact with the scalp. The P3 activityof the brain can be detected by the electrodes. The EEG amplifier 3amplifies the electrical signals from the brain by a factor ofapproximately 60,000 which makes it resolvable into at least 50 computerunits by the A/D converter 4 in the next stage, but does not amplify theactivity to a level high enough to overdrive the A/D converter. Anyconventional converter may by utilized, and the following descriptiondoes not intend to be limiting. The A/D converter is an 8 bit unit with2⁸ =256 possible values (0-255).

The 8-bit main microcomputer 6 has several functions.

1. After the main program is loaded from floppy disk, the computerreceives information from the operator concerning biographicalinformation about the subject. It also receives information from theoperator concerning which questions will be put to the subject, how manytrials are to be run, what intertrial interval (I_(t)) to use, and otherparametric information.

2. It then presents the question-items to the subject every I_(t)seconds through display terminal 7. It accomplishes this either bysending item word characters simultaneously to the subject and operatordisplay terminals 8 or by sending a code number (via an interface) tothe optional second microcomputer 9. This unit causes a speech processor10 to output the question items in spoken form to earphones or a A/Dchannels for the operator's inspection.

At a precise time (100 m sec or 300 m sec for visually and acousticallypresented items, respectively) prior to item presentation, the maincomputer repeatedly samples all 4 A/D input channels once every 5(visual) or 8 (acoustic) m sec, 256 times. Each sample is sent to 2(optionally 3) places: (i) a temporary memory buffer of 256 memory bytelocations per A/D channel, (ii) a permanent, accumulating sum memorybuffer of 512 bytes per a/d channel (and optionally (iii), the optionalsecond computer processor's memory). The functions of these storagesare: (i) the 4 temporary buffers will be scanned for artifacts. Eye andERP channels are inspected. If an artifact is found, all channels'temporary storage values are subtracted from their respectiveaccumulating sum buffers. The temporary buffer is erased on every trialas the new temporary data are stored ("destructively") on top and inplace of the old values. (ii) The accumulating sum buffers add eachtrial's data into an accumulating double precision (i.e., 16 bit) sum.There are 36 of these 512 byte buffers; 4 channels ×9 different items.The main computer determines on each trial which of the 9 question-itemswas presented, and thus, which of the 9 sets of 4 channels the trial'sdata go to. At the conclusion of the run, each of the 36 accumulatedsums is divided by the numbers of trials having contributed to it toyield the 36 average wave forms. This is accomplished by a secondprogram which performs other post-run analyses as described below. It isautomatically entered from disc at the end of the main program. (iii)The optional second microcomputer processor, besides being used, asnoted above, to drive the speech unit, stores each single trial'scomplete data set. This storage is of all unprocessed singletrials'single sweeps. The eye channel data is stored but not necessaryfor analysis. This ERP data is stored so as to enable performance of avarimax-rotated principal component analysis mostly for researchpurposes after the main run. Two separate second processors may beutilized; one to store the 432 sweeps and one to handle speechsynthesis.)

The printer 11 outputs 3 kinds of data: (i) It echoes all theoperator-entered parameters from prior to the run. (ii) It outputs thenumerical results of the wave analysis softwave, e.g., latency andamplitude values of P3 in the averaged ERP's determined. It also outputsin the guilty knowledge test the results of comparing (subtracting)guilty item-evoked ERP's with control item-evoked ERP's. In the controlquestion test it outputs the results of comparison of control andrelevant items, i.e., the printer prints diagnoses of guilt or innocenceor non-cooperation, or indeterminateness. (iii) The printer also "draws"all 36 averages on paper for confirmation and further study. An optionalXY plotter plots the waves.

FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION OF SOFTWARE FOR WAVE ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION(a) Preliminary collection of average ERP's

As described in the hardware description, the main computer programaccumulates all artifact-free single waves for a given electrode site(e.g., PZ) evoked by item #1 into a summated ERP (for PZ) number 1-E_(pl). Likewise it collects E_(p2), E_(p3) . . . E_(p9). It does thesame for the CZ and FZ sites, to yield E_(cl), E_(c2) . . . E_(c9),E_(f1), E_(f2) .. E_(f9). There are thus 9 (items)×3 (sites)=27 sums.The eye movement channel also yields 9 sums.

(b) Analysis and Interpretation

After the last trial, the main program calls in another program whichdivides all sums by the number of contributing trials to yield theaveraged ERP for each item for each site. An averaged ERP is a waveformshowing voltage as a function of time, as is the single ERP, except thatthe voltage for each sequential time point in the average ERP is theaverage voltage of the ERP at that time point. Using 5 m sec per timepoint resolution as accomplished with visual presentation, E_(p1), timepoint #1, is the averaged ERP voltage over all item #1 trials obtainedby averaging all item #1 trials' samples of voltage taken 5 m sec intothe recording epoch; time point #2 is the averaged ERP voltage over allitem #1 trials' samples of voltage taken 10 m sec after recording start,and so on.

For each average ERP the program now calculates the average value of thefirst 20 time points (which=100 m sec at 5 m sec/time point). This isthe pre-stimulus baseline EEG level, since recording begins 100 m secprior to item onset in visual presentation (and later for acousticpresentation). Next, for each sequential 100 m sec segment between 400and 700 m sec post stimulus (=500 to 800 m sec from recording onset),the program calculates the average voltage. Thus it has the average from400 to 499 m sec, from 401 to 500 m sec, from 402 to 501 m sec . . . andso on to 601 to 700 m sec. Each averaged segment value is now subtractedfrom the prestimulus baseline segment value. The program retains themaximum (peak) value among these sequential segments and defines it asthe P3 value for the average. P3 is ordinarily found between 400 and 700m sec post stimulus when complex verbal stimuli are used. Its peaklatency varies but it ordinarily falls somewhere between 400 and 700 msec. P3 is thus defined as the maximum positive voltage average (of 100m sec of data), referenced to baseline, between 400 and 700 m sec poststimulus for each wave. This is the main measure and the program printsit as "MX" and also prints its latency ("LX") corresponding to themidpoint time point of the chosen MX segment. This is done for all 27averaged ERP's.

An auxiliary direct P3 index is accurately diagnostic; it is called"DX". To obtain DX the program computes the minimum value of sequential100 m sec segments between 600 and 1200 m sec post-stimulus, referencedto baseline. This is called "NM" and is also referenced to baseline. DX,then, =MX-NM. The program also causes the printout of NM (and itslatency, LM) and DX. NM is the maximum negativity (minimal value of ERP)between 600 and 1200 m sec post-stimulus. It corresponds to a finalnegative component; N5, which is typically seen when the amplifierfilter settings described above are used. DX then is an N5-P3"peak-to-peak" estimate of P3. Theoretically, N5 may be an independentcomponent in the ERP. DX serves as a criterion to ensure that latepositive waves are P3's, not DC shifts.

Accordingly, the program has a direct P3 estimate

(whether defined as MX or DX) for each of the 9 average ERP's withineach channel. Preferably, only the PZ channel is utilized for diagnosissince it appears to be the most reliably diagnostic.

The procedures described herein, however, utilize only the direct P3determinations with the output MX value for only the PZ site.

In the guilty knowledge procedure, the program computes the average MXfor all 7 non-guilty items. This =MX_(i). There is 1 guilty item, 1to-be-counted (TBC) or to-be-"yes" (TBY) item and 7 non-guilty items. Indeveloping a norm, it appears that a value of 9 computer units (which isabout 3 μV, baseline to peak) is what the MX value will be determinedfor non-guilty items. For guilty items, P3 (baseline to peak) tends tobe more than 19 units (or 6 μV). If the MXi for non-guilty items is ≦9units while the guilty item MX=MXg is greater than 19 units the printerprints "has guilty knowledge" with an appropriate probability statement.If the guilty MX value is greater than MX_(i) by 10 units or more, aguilty diagnosis is output. It is noted on the basis of preliminary datathat 9 is an average value for MX_(i) with a standard error of about 4.If the MX_(g) -MX_(i) difference is within 4 units (i.e., if MXg≦13given MXi=9) an "innocent" diagnosis is output. If the MXi versus MXgdifference is greater than 4 but less than 10 units, an "indeterminate"diagnosis is output.

All the above assumes that 108 artifact-free trials were collected withno more than 54 trials rejected for artifact i.e., 162 trials (=150% of108) were run in all. If this criterion is not met, i.e., if a 163rdtrial is detected, the pogrom stops and reports this fact, noting that"Artifact Excess" was detected.

Further, DX must be less than 0, (which means the ERP does go negativeafter P3) in the guilty item average. Otherwise an apparent P3 could bea positive-going DC shift.

If the program detects MX values for less than 2 innocent itemsexceeding the value 19, "suspected non-cooperation; resultsindeterminate" is printed out. (This result suggests that the subjectattempted to defeat the test by not following instructions, i.e., he wasinstructed to count only the TBC item but counted other items also. Thiscould lead to P3 responses in control averages which can't happenotherwise. If the DX criterion is not met, "indeterminate" is output.

In control question procedures, all will have 1 or 2 relevant (r) items,3 to 4 control (C) items, and 1-5 irrelevant (I) items. P3 will bedetermined in exactly the same way for the control question tests as itwas in the guilty knowledge tests, for all, R, C, and I items. In orderfor the program to generate a guilty diagnosis, 6 conditions need to besatisfied:

    ______________________________________                                        (1) 108 artifact free trials                                                      in 162 attempts                                                           (2) no evidence of non-cooperation                                                or lack of following instruc-                                                                           As in                                               tions by subject          guilty knowledge                                (3) passing memory tests,     test                                                post-trial                                                                (4) DX must be greater than 0.                                                (5) P3 average for R items must be less than 2 standard                           deviations larger than P3 for I item average.                             (6) P3 average for R items must be a to-be-determined                             normative value larger than P3 average for C items.                           For an innocent diagnosis, one needs conditions (1)-(4)                       above satisfied and also                                                      (5) P3 average for R items is within 1 standard                               deviation of P3 average for I items.                                          (5) P3 average for the C item is within 1 standard                            deviation of P3 average for R item (if the value for C                        is less than the value for R), or if the C value is less                      than the R value.                                                         ______________________________________                                    

The program determines if the conditions listed above for controlquestion tests are fulfilled, as in guilty knowledge procedure.

Although the present invention has been described with reference topreferred embodiments, workers skilled in the art will recognize thatchanges may be made in form and detail without departing from the spiritand scope of the invention.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of determining the cognitive response topersonally meaningful information of a subject to a repeatedly presentedsignificant guilty knowledge stimulus or stimuli interspersed withnonsignificant stimuli comprising:(a) providing a source of stipulationto the subject, including said guilty knowledge and said nonsignificantstimuli; (b) providing detection means for detecting event relatedpotentials; (c) translating event related potentials to P300 brainwaves; (d) obtaining P300 brain wave activity; and (e) analyzing saidP300 brain wave activity for guilty knowledge detection.
 2. The methodof claim 1 wherein the event related potentials are detected, translatedinto P300 brain waves and analyzed by a computer.
 3. A method ofdetermining the cognitive response to personally meaningful informationof a subject to a repeatedly presented significant control questionstimulus or stimuli interspersed with non-significant stimulicomprising:(a) providing a source of stimulation to the subject,including said guilty knowledge and said nonsignificant stimuli; (b)providing detection means for detecting event related potentials; (c)translating event related potentials to P300 brain waves; (d) obtainingP300 brain have activity; and (e) analyzing said P300 brain waveactivity for control question testing.
 4. The method of claim 1 or 3wherein the stimuli may be visual or auditory.
 5. The method of claim 1or 3 wherein the stimuli may be words.